P40 Vs all other fighters in Europe

Shortround6 · Jan 11, 2022

I would note that one of these accounts of the early Soviet P-40s says that there were no spare engines and the Soviets re-engined about 40 P-40s with M-105P engines and that reduced the speed by about 12kph. Most of the planes with M-105P engines were transferred to another regiment. The account does seem to have a misprint in regards to speed (477KPH?) but without the altitude it is very difficult to judge.

The Russians were in desperate circumstances. They were often worried about what was going to happen in few days or few weeks. Air Forces in other parts of the World may have taken a somewhat longer view. Burning through your stock of available engines in a few weeks for gain a temporary advantage might be a good tactic, It might be a poor one if your enemy can resupply when you can't and you have no spare engines.

P-40s rarely supplied more than a couple of regiments at a time in the same front.

The US screwed up in 1942/43 buy not suppling enough Merlins for the P-40Fs and Ls and the British gave hundreds of Used Merlins to the US in NA/Med to be used as donner engines for overhauls.

BiffF15 · Jan 11, 2022

SaparotRob said:
What were the VVS paying for the P-40?

Exactly.

BiffF15 · Jan 11, 2022

Thumpalumpacus said:
I've done some hurt on a Hertz, too. Ain't my engine.

It's been said many times, on TDY, that you can't die in a rent a car...

FLYBOYJ · Jan 11, 2022

Schweik said:
quite often planes were eventually 'souped up' (used at higher boost ratings etc.)

Souped up? No, just a change in operating parameters maybe based on a factory modification or the manufacturer allowing higher operating parameters based on field data. "Souping Up" an engine (speaking in terms of an aircraft engine) is changing something in the basic design to enhance performance, usually outside the manufacturer's specifications (oversize pistons, tighter clearances, etc.)

Shortround6 · Jan 11, 2022

BiffF15 said:
Exactly.

I would note that the Russians had a strange incentive plan for P-40 pilots.
If the unit did well in combat (and if they lived) they got to trade in their P-40s for Yaks or La-5s or P-39s.
If they did not distinguish themselves in combat (and kept the P-40s running ) they just got some replacement P-40s.

BiffF15 · Jan 11, 2022

Shortround6 said:
I would note that the Russians had a strange incentive plan for P-40 pilots.
If they unit did well in combat (and if they lived) they got to trade in their P-40s for Yaks or La-5s or P-39s.
If they did not distinguish themselves in combat (and the P-40s running ) they just got some replacement P-40s.

Interesting plan. No motive to burn out the motors at all. And after surviving to the upgraded aircraft, they give you a ground hog. Can't win for losing.

special ed · Jan 11, 2022

Schweik said:
Golodnikov mentions they flew at higher RPMs and removed some guns from their fighters to lighten them, to get the performance up sufficiently to deal with 109s. He also says engines were burning out after ~ 50 hours. Compared to the life span of an I-16 or LaGG-3 it may make sense.

But they gradually figured out how to deal with Allison (and Merlin) engines better as time went on.

One of my books on Russian aircraft said the Russian pilots flew everywhere at full throttle. With my failing memory, I can't remember which book, so much reading is required. Now days when I find something noteworthy while reading, I put in a bookmark. My books are beginning to look like cactus plants.

Shortround6 · Jan 11, 2022

FLYBOYJ said:
Souped up? No, just a change in operating parameters maybe based on a factory modification or the manufacturer allowing higher operating parameters based on field data. "Souping Up" an engine (speaking in terms of an aircraft engine) is changing something in the basic design to enhance performance, usually outside the manufacturer's specifications (oversize pistons, tighter clearances, etc.)

The Merlins went through a number of changes but as FLYBOYJ says, there weren't souped up.
The Merlin 45 started at 9lbs boost and very soon went to 12lbs boost. After they proved they could take it ( didn't break very often) they were approved to use 15/16lbs boost.
A similar change followed the Merlin XX.
The only "souping" up they did was to modify the supercharger drive in order to take the increased mechanical load on the supercharger drive shaft.

A Merlin 45 made the same amount of power at 20,000ft if it was rated for 9lbs of boost or if it was rated at 16lbs but it could only hold 16 lbs to 13,000f in high speed flight.

Thumpalumpacus · Jan 11, 2022

BiffF15 said:
It's been said many times, on TDY, that you can't die in a rent a car...

We did things to vans signed out from the motor pool that we'd never do to our own POVs.

Schweik · Jan 11, 2022

BiffF15 said:
Sounds like they were pushing the engines beyond the book if they were consistently getting 50 hours out of them, and losing so many a/c for mechanical problems. And with that they thought it was a better plane than the indigenous stuff.

There was some of that, but apparently the real reason for the short engine life was that they were maintenance issues with the engines. First, the Soviet ground crews were not used to the 'oil culture' requirements of the Merlin (for Hurricanes, at that time, later for Spitfires) and for the Allisons. Soviet engines were apparently much more tolerant of dust. Second, they had to winterize the engines, including for example making provisions to drain all fluids from the engines and other aircraft systems every night during winter, which in some cases meant creating drains where there weren't any. They get into a bunch of this in the article.

From my understanding, they eventually figured a lot of this out, in part during the extensive work-up they did on the P-39.

Schweik · Jan 11, 2022

SaparotRob said:
What were the VVS paying for the P-40?

Actually, per the article:

"The first batch of Tomahawks from the USA was sent to the USSR in September 1941. This shipment was purchased for gold and was not part of the Lend-Lease program, the provisions of which were extended to the Soviet Union only on 7 November of that year."

Schweik · Jan 11, 2022

Shortround6 said:
I would note that one of these accounts of the early Soviet P-40s says that there were no spare engines and the Soviets re-engined about 40 P-40s with M-105P engines and that reduced the speed by about 12kph. Most of the planes with M-105P engines were transferred to another regiment. The account does seem to have a misprint in regards to speed (477KPH?) but without the altitude it is very difficult to judge.

My understanding is that the M-105P engined P-40s were not deemed suitable for front line combat and were relocated to training or PVO units.

Shortround6 said:
The Russians were in desperate circumstances. They were often worried about what was going to happen in few days or few weeks. Air Forces in other parts of the World may have taken a somewhat longer view. Burning through your stock of available engines in a few weeks for gain a temporary advantage might be a good tactic, It might be a poor one if your enemy can resupply when you can't and you have no spare engines.

Exactly. The situation was dire in 1941 and certainly the first half of 1942. It was not unusual to send off say, a unit of 12 I-16s or LaGG-3s and have 2 or 3 come back. If they had a squadron of 12 Tomahawks and were only losing 1 or 2 per mission, (half to mechanical failure) and most of the pilots were surviving, that was still a plus even if they only made it a dozen missions or so before they needed an engine overhaul or a new engine.

They did also sort these problems out as I already mentioned, so that they were getting much longer running time out of Allisons later in the war.

Apparently there were also similar engine problems in the Western Desert in the early days, which is why the adapted the Vokes filter etc. I gather the Germans had problems with engines burning out too.

Shortround6 said:
P-40s rarely supplied more than a couple of regiments at a time in the same front.

As I mentioned, most of the P-40 units were made into Guards units and they were put into the heaviest fighting in some zones, though some were up near Finland.

Shortround6 said:
The US screwed up in 1942/43 buy not suppling enough Merlins for the P-40Fs and Ls and the British gave hundreds of Used Merlins to the US in NA/Med to be used as donner engines for overhauls.

True. They had a limited number but worked out a clever system for engines and spares pretty quickly, largely via the British.

wuzak · Jan 11, 2022

Shortround6 said:
The only "souping" up they did was to modify the supercharger drive in order to take the increased mechanical load on the supercharger drive shaft.

Is that "souping up", or making production modifications to improve reliability?

Schweik · Jan 11, 2022

Shortround6 said:
I would note that the Russians had a strange incentive plan for P-40 pilots.
If the unit did well in combat (and if they lived) they got to trade in their P-40s for Yaks or La-5s or P-39s.
If they did not distinguish themselves in combat (and kept the P-40s running ) they just got some replacement P-40s.

I would say that is a mischaracterization - if the Unit did well it became a Guards unit, and Guards units eventually got newer and better planes. In many cases that did mean a Yak, La-5 or P-39 (which the Soviets considered better) and as I mentioned before. In some cases it meant going from Tomahawk to Kittyhawk variants.

This was also, incidentally, the same 'incentive plan' for all Soviet guards units, including infantry and armor units. Guards units got the best available kit (and more food, ammunition, and everything else). That was their ruthless Malthusian system at work.

That is similar to what you wrote, but to me it's not quite the same thing.

As I mentioned a couple of times, the Kittyhawk, especially the P-40K, was an effective ride for quite a few Soviet pilots. For example Nikolai Fedorovitch Kuznetsov seen here celebrating after his 20th air victory, in front of his P-40K5 (you can see the tail fin just above his number 23).

Kuznetsov was an ace several times over, (credited with 21 solo and 12 group victories) and twice HSU. He initially flew the I-16 and Hurricane, but scored all but one of his first 16 solo victories in the Kittyhawk before transferring to the P-39.

There is a bio about him here Kuznetsov Nikolai Fedorovich, photo, biography

Overall, the Soviets liked the P-40, but they never loved it like they did the P-39. For them it was a middling aircraft, and they definitely thought a Yak 9 or La 5FN was better, as it undoubtedly was for their purposes. They also didn't think much of the P-47 or the Spit V for that matter.

pbehn · Jan 11, 2022

wuzak said:
Is that "souping up", or making production modifications to improve reliability?

I used the word to describe non standard machines presented or reported as typical of production. Things like removing heavy items and filling painting and polishing.

wuzak · Jan 11, 2022

pbehn said:
I used the word to describe non standard machines presented or reported as typical of production. Things like removing heavy items and filling painting and polishing.

But others have used it to describe production upgrades.

Thumpalumpacus · Jan 11, 2022

Schweik said:
Overall, the Soviets liked the P-40, but they never loved it like they did the P-39.

Probably because the -40 didn't have nose armor.

pbehn · Jan 11, 2022

wuzak said:
But others have used it to describe production upgrades.

Thread drift. The Merlin (and all other) was improved throughout its life, but to me all engines issued for production Aircraft were production engines and were safe to use within the stated values given by RR (and Packard). Whatever was done in experimental programmes is another issue because they wouldnt be quoted in a test on a delivered production machine.

wuzak · Jan 11, 2022

pbehn said:
Thread drift. The Merlin (and all other) was improved throughout its life, but to me all engines issued for production Aircraft were production engines and were safe to use within the stated values given by RR (and Packard). Whatever was done in experimental programmes is another issue because they wouldnt be quoted in a test on a delivered production machine.

I should say that I agree with you regarding the term "souped up".

There may have been one or two companies that resorted to "souping up" their aircraft for factory testing in order to meet promises/get sales. I think one of those made groundhogs.

Admiral Beez · Jan 11, 2022

Thumpalumpacus said:
Probably because the -40 didn't have nose armor.

Nor a big cannon in the nose.

P40 Vs all other fighters in Europe

Major General

Tech Sergeant

Tech Sergeant

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Major General

Tech Sergeant

2nd Lieutenant

Major General

Major

Banned

Banned

Banned

Captain

Banned

Colonel

Captain

Major

Colonel

Captain

Major

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads